The expansion of the local economy is estimated at between 9.5
per cent and 10 per cent this year... a great deal of momentum
was created in the past two years of superstrong growth and this
is propelling the economy along in the current year.2

This headline from a local newspaper in Thailand in mid-1990
illustrates the buoyancy of the national economy and the positive
trend of economic development, as seen in figure 1. Thailand has
currently one of the fastest growing economies in the world. One
of the pervasive preoccupations of Thai policy makers is to
estimate if and when Thailand will be classified as a newly
industrialized country (NIC), in view of the 10 per cent average
GDP growth of the past three years.

How does this position reflect the situation with regard to
human rights in the country and to its nexus with technology?

On scrutiny, the situation is more ambivalent than an initial
impression would reveal. The incidence of poverty is high in the
country, particularly in the north-east, while income
distribution leaves much to be desired. This is elaborated in
table 1. The cynic may well point out that the glowing
statistics, as well as the technological inputs into the growing
economy, neglect the underlying social issues involved. If wealth
has really increased, it has tended to accumulate in urban areas,
in the hands of the few, rather than to be dispersed in rural
areas where the majority of people live.

It is precisely this ambiguous situation that calls for an
appraisal of the linkage between human rights and technology in
developing Thailand. It is closely interrelated with issues of
rural and agricultural development, industrialization,
urbanization, environmental concerns, and the socialization
process - matters of concern to the ordinary people who are at
the core of this study.

The term "human rights" raises different
interpretations in Thai society. In past decades, it was much
influenced by the political struggles to cast off the vestiges of
authoritarianism in Thailand. In the 1970s, a student-led
movement managed to oust a dictatorial regime, but was later
crushed by a military-led backlash. The advocacy of human rights
during that era was very much based upon the call for democracy
and freedom of expression. The aspirations of the time gave a
political meaning to the term "human rights" as an
umbrella for self-determination. It provided justification for
protection of the advocates of democracy, and for the release of
political prisoners.3

The present government, led by General Chatichai Choonhavan,
is the first to have an elected prime minister for many years.4
The political dynamics have changed, and generally it may be said
that political rights are now respected to a large extent. While
military pressures still pervade the intricate political
machinery, most political prisoners have been released from
prison. Those who remain in prison tend to be cases of lèse
majesté or ideological cases, whose numbers are limited. In
1990, there was the thorny issue of press freedom, as there
remained on record various laws that conferred excessive powers
on the executive to close down newspapers. Particular reference
must be made to Revolutionary Decree No. 42.5
Auspiciously, the setting became more liberal at the end of 1990,
when the decree was abrogated by the government.

On the other hand, beyond the political spectrum, there is a
whole array of socio-economic and cultural issues which have come
to the fore in recent years.

In 1990, a bill to provide social security to workers was in a
state of uncertainty for a while, owing to the conflict between
different interests. However, towards the end of the year the
bill was passed, and a social security system is now being
introduced for employees. As already noted, poverty, particularly
in rural areas, is rampant, and the gap between the rich and the
poor seems to be increasing. Collateral to this, environmental
decline, which is often conditioned by and is a consequence of
poverty, has begun to affect Thai society. A freak mudslide in
1988, due in part to illegal logging, and a rare hurricane in
1989 which caused several hundred deaths, pointed to the
relationship between natural disasters, the degradation of
natural resources, poverty, and vested interests.

Evidently, the scope of human rights in Thai understanding now
goes beyond merely political questions. There are issues of
development and under-development which raise questions
concerning a wider dimension of human rights.6 In a
way, it parallels the global interest in the right to
development, defined by the 1986 General Assembly Declaration as
constituting "an inalienable human right by virtue of which
every human person and all people are entitled to participate in,
contribute to and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political
development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms
can be fully realised." 7

In passing, one should note that Thailand voted for the 1948
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, since then she
has rarely acceded to international human rights instruments. For
example, she has not become a party to the 1966 human rights
Covenants. The reason seems to be the perception that to accede
to external instruments would be to invite scrutiny which may be
detrimental to national security and executive discretion.
However, beyond governmental circles, non-governmental entities
often voice concerns on human rights issues by reference to
international standards.

For the purpose of this study, it is this setting which
influences the analysis of the various sectors concerned. An
understanding of the context in which one is not necessarily
invoking remedies for human rights violations once they have
occurred is also required. An equally important consideration is
preventive strategies which tackle the root causes of human
rights abuses, such as the provision of aid and services to the
needy. There is the added consideration that one is not only
looking to laws and policies as sanctions against those who
distort human rights - one is also concerned with other laws and
policies of a facilitative nature, e.g. to provide incentives for
development and change.

Complementary to this, one should not simply refer to
justiciable rights, i.e. rights to be invoked in courts with
appurtenant judicial remedies. This is all the more important
because in developing countries the mass base of the population
tends to be distant, mentally and physically, from the courts and
lawyers, who are seen by them as expensive and time-consuming.

One aims at making an impact not merely via the formal legal
system but equally via the ability of any institutions or
personnel holding the reins of power to ensure more
responsiveness to the needs of the population. This includes not
only the government itself but also the private business sector.
One likewise looks for alternative means of advocating societal
change, e. g. non-governmental organizations and the mass media.
A key consideration is to promote more grass-roots initiatives
and people's participation in the process of development
planning, implementation, benefit-sharing, and evaluation.

It follows from this reasoning that one is not referring
solely to the role of those organizations which identify
themselves as promoters of human rights in the political sense.
One is also projecting a key role for organizations which do not
necessarily see themselves as directly involved in human rights
matters. This includes, in particular, many local
non-governmental organizations dealing with development aid and
assistance, for example, satisfying the basic needs of food,
shelter, and health of the rural population.

In this respect, we can hark back to the wisdom of the
following comment made during the First United Nations
Development Decade (1970s), when the exhortation to states to
improve their GNP at the macroeconomic level, without sufficient
regard to income distribution and resource reallocation among the
population in pursuit of equity, was subject to criticism. It
warned as follows:

One of the greatest dangers in development policy lies in the
tendency to give to the more material aspects of growth an
overriding and disproportionate emphasis. The end may be
forgotten in preoccupation with the means. Human rights may be
submerged and human beings seen only as instruments of production
rather than as free entities for whose welfare and cultural
advance the increased production is intended.8

The reorientation of thought affecting the present study is
encapsulated in the following yardsticks later propounded by the
UN:

1. The realisation of the potentialities of the human
person in harmony with the community should be seen as the
central purpose of development;

2. The human person should be regarded as the subject and
not the object of the development process;

3. Development requires the satisfaction of both material
and non-material basic needs; 4. Respect for human rights is
fundamental to the development process;

5. The human person must be able to participate fully in
shaping his own reality; 6. Respect for the principles of
equality and non-discrimination is essential; and

7. The achievement of a degree of individual and
collective self-reliance must be an integral part of the
process.9

A plethora of definitions of the term "technology"
can be found, including the following:

A body of skills, knowledge, and procedures for making, using
and doing useful things.10

The body of knowledge that is applicable to the production of
goods and the creation of new goods.11

The systematic application of collective human rationality
with a view to achieving greater control over nature and
over human processes of all kinds.12

It is probably easier to specify what technology is not,
rather than what it is. It is not merely hardware in the form of
machinery and tangible materials. It also incorporates
"knowledge," embodied in the term "software."
Hence the close linkage with education and socialization, a theme
to be treated later in this study. As a UN publication has
acknowledged, technology is: a combination of hardware and
software with the relative proportions varying from one extreme
to the other. Purely hardware technology can be considered as
being of two types: the end-use product type (such as
automobiles, computers, televisions) and the production tool type
(such as instruments, equipment and machinery). Software
technology can also be considered as being of two types: the
know-how type (such as processes, techniques and methods) and the
know-why type (such as knowledge, skills and experience).13

The nuances are rendered more complicated by the unsettled
notion of technology transfer. Four tendencies are visible from
the documentation available. The first suggests that there is a
transfer of technology "when it is used effectively in a new
environment. No attention is paid to the origin of inputs of
production. As long as new technology is employed efficiently,
for example even if the whole factory is run by foreigners,
technology is considered transferred."14

The second tendency is based upon whether "the local work
force is able to take charge of the imported technology and to do
so efficiently."15 By contrast, according to the
third tendency, technology transfer takes place "when
technology spreads to other local productive units in the
recipient economy," 16 such as through
sub-licensing agreements. Finally, the fourth tendency emphasizes
a process of indigenization, i.e. technology transfer takes place
when "imported technology is fully understood by local
workers, and when these workers begin to adapt the imported
technology to the specific needs of the environment.'' 17

Much of the discussion at the international level concerns not
so much the puzzle "what is technology transfer?" but
"what is international technology transfer?" This is
germane to efforts under the aegis of UNCTAV to draft a Code of
Conduct on the Transfer of Technology. All drafts agree that a
transaction is international, and thus within the scope of the
draft code, if the technology is "transferred across
national boundaries." 18 Beyond that, there is
less agreement. What if the parties are not located in different
countries, but one of them is controlled by a foreign entity and
the technology transferred has not been developed in the
technology-acquiring country? Within the UNCTAD forum, opinions
diverge on this. Developing countries view such situations as
"international," thereby falling under the draft code.19
However, the developed world disagrees, thus excluding
parent-subsidiary situations from the instrument where the
subsidiary located in a country transfers technology to another
party in that same country.20

A related catchphrase in the minds of policy makers is
appropriate technology. One Thai commentator has identified the
following features:

- It must be adapted to the culture, economy, and
environment of the locality.
- It must be consistent with the past practices of the group.
- It must be adaptable and have few constraints.
- It must respond to the raw materials of the locality.
- It must be suitable to the local environment.
- It must be operated and supervised by the people of the
locality.
-The benefits must accrue to those users.21

As shown in table 2, there are many impediments to the quest
for appropriate technology. As will be seen later, what is
appropriate in Thai society is often elusive, especially as
technology produces both positive and negative impacts, sometimes
simultaneously.

Historically, many forms of technology were found in Thailand
thousands of years ago. There are remnants of technology
concerning the use of seeds from as far back as 7,000-9,000 years
ago. From 5,000-7,000 years ago, there is evidence of metal and
copper utilization. In the Middle Ages (Sukothai era), there was
ample use of ceramics, drainage, and building construction. Some
three centuries ago, with the advent of Europeans in the region,
medical instruments, irrigation, printing presses, and guns
arrived at Thailand's doorstep. Then came all the trappings of
modernization, including telegraph and postal communications,
railways, roads, and electricity. Interestingly, the first rice
mill was set up with the help of the United States in 1858.22

Currently, it is the Ministry of Science, Technology and
Energy which oversees policy on technology. The national policy
is shaped by the Sixth National Economic and Social Development
Plan (1987-1991) ("The Sixth Plan"), whose guidelines
include the following:23

(1) to develop the country's policy-making and planning
capacities in science and technology;

(2) to develop the basic organizational structure,
together with the laws and regulations necessary for science
and technology development;

(3) to develop manpower efficiency in science and
technology by improving the quality and use of manpower,
particularly in engineering, science, agriculture, technical
and vocational education, and secondary education;

(4) to encourage efficiency in national research and
development;

(5) to encourage technology transfer from abroad and
increase its effectiveness in benefiting the economic and
technological development of the nation;

(6) to develop a new data and information system for
science and technology; and

(7) to promote the role of the private sector in
developing and using technology.

Table 2. Problems with the current thinking about
appropriate technology

Very little consideration of
quality, productivity, and efficiency necessary for
commercial attractiveness
Use of small scale which overlooks profitability

Lack of future orientation

Entire thrust is towards
dealing with immediate problems
Little or no consideration for future solutions

Creation of false hopes

Failure to realize the
inadequacy of small-scale technologies to deal with the
immense magnitude of development problems

Inadequate rate of change

The use of rural-based
technology for national development is a very slow
process compared with the fast growth in population and
aspirations

Lack of integration with
technology transfer

Creating an artificial
boundary between technology transfer and technology
development
Very little attempt to achieve a coherent strategy

Lack of institutional
infrastructure

Very little has been done
for the creation of a technological innovation climate
Institutional constraints on transfer and development of
appropriate technology have been largely ignored

Lack of information flow on
alternative technologies

Lack of information on
various technologies developed in different countries
Failures receive more publicity than successes

Emphasizing the tool and not
the problem

The technology selection
process ignores some vital aspects of the problems, such
as the image of modernism created by the powerful
demonstration effect

Lack of people's
participation

Every appropriate technology
must start with and be implemented by people who need it.
What is appropriate can only be determined by the people
themselves

Source: UN (ESCAP), Technology for Development
(1984), p. 85.

At the transnational level of technology transfer, technology
has arrived in Thailand via the private sector, bilateral aid,
and international organizations. Thailand has no law on such
technology transfer, and the policy is one of acceptance with
open arms.24 Japan ranks first in this field in terms
of direct investment in Thailand. It is difficult to know how
much technology has come into the country, particularly via the
private sector, as there is no repository of technology
contracts. The only two national entities which carry out some
monitoring of these contracts are the Board of Investment, for
the purpose of granting investment incentives, and the Bank of
Thailand, for the purpose of repatriation of investment profits.

Although local research and development of technology, as well
as local technology transfer, are very much on the policy agenda,
it is difficult to assess how far they have been promoted in
practice. In this respect, a sampling is given in Appendix 1, by
the list of projects promoted by the Ministry of Technology, but
this does not imply that all the projects have been completed or
have attained their objective.

On the legal front, one should note that there is an array of
laws affecting the utilization of technology, although they tend
to concern the industrialization process rather than other
sectors. The genesis is the Constitution itself (1978), which
calls upon the state to promote the development of science and
technology.25 The substantive laws include the
following:

1. Patents. The current national law is the Patent Act
1979.26 By section 3 of this Act, "patent"
is defined as "a document issued under the provisions of
this Act to grant protection for an invention or a design."
A patent may only be granted for an invention if the invention is
new, involves an inventive step, and is capable of industrial
application. The requirement of novelty means that the following
are not patentable:

- An invention widely known or used by others in Thailand
before the filing of the patent application.

- An invention the subject-matter or details of which were
described or other wise disclosed to the public in any
manner, whether inside or outside Thailand, before the filing
of the patent application. - An invention which is the
subject of a pending application filed more than 12 months
previously in a foreign country.

- An invention for which a patent was applied for in
Thailand, but in respect of which the applicant had abandoned
such application. Inventions which are not patentable
include, inter alia:

- Machines for use in agriculture.

- Animals, plants, or biological processes for the
production of animals or plants.

- Inventions which are contrary to public order, good
morals, or public health or welfare.

To be an eligible applicant, the applicant must be a Thai
national or a national of a country which allows persons of Thai
nationality to apply for patents in such country. If granted, the
patent is valid for a period of 15 years, while a patent for
product design is valid for a period of seven years.
Incidentally, Thailand has not signed the Paris Convention on the
International Union for the Protection of Industrial Property
1883.

The current debate on the patent legislation is on whether to
amend it to include drugs (pharmaceuticals); although this would
help to protect foreign inventions, the prices of drugs would
rise to the detriment of ordinary Thais. As will be seen below in
relation to agriculture, there has been talk of enabling new
cultivars to be patented, although this has not come to pass.

2. Copyright. Protection is accorded automatically to
any "work" created by natural and juristic persons by
the Copyright Act 1978.27 This includes literature,
drama, music, and films. There is no need for registration of
copyright. Foreigners may also benefit if they create a work
while residing in Thailand during the creation. Where they reside
abroad, they may be entitled to protection if they return to
Thailand for the initial publishing. As Thailand is a signatory
to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and
Artistic Works, international copyright protection is accorded to
copyrights registered in other countries where those countries
recognize Thai copyrights on a reciprocal basis.

In 1988 the main debate on this question was whether to offer
protection to US works, as the US had not acceded to the Berne
Convention at the time. However, the US did later accede, and the
works of US nationals are now entitled to recognition in Thailand
on a reciprocal basis. There remains the unsettled issue of
whether computer software is protected under the current Thai
law. The uncertain position is left to local courts to decide.

3. Trademarks. Protection is accorded by the Trademarks
Act 1931 and 1961.28 A trademark may comprise a
device, brand, heading, ticket, name, signature, word, letter,
numeral, or a combination. It needs to be registered in Thailand.
Further protection is provided by the Civil and Criminal Codes.
The plethora of counterfeit goods using brand names in Thailand
is a headache to those responsible for the implementation of this
law.

4. Legal incentives. Various incentives, such as tax
and tariff deduction, are accorded by a variety of laws,
including the Investment Promotion Act 1977.29 The
Ministry of Technology issued in 1988 decrees allowing the
reduction of tariffs on machinery which saves energy, and on
machinery helping to combat pollution.30 The ministry
has also established a revolving fund for those who wish to
borrow for research and development of technology in a number of
sectors, including agriculture, food, electricity, and machinery.31

On scrutiny, one should observe that there is still
underdevelopment of technology at the local level, thereby
restricting the benefits of these laws and incentives concerning
intellectual property. For instance, there have been relatively
few applications by Thais to register patents; the majority have
been foreigners. This indicates that indigenous technological
developments, particularly in the industrial sector, leave much
to be desired. The consequence is that one is too dependent on
foreign technology without having the power to adapt it fully to
local uses.

As implied earlier, the litmus test for assessing the linkage
between human rights and technology is to look at a domain much
broader than the political field. This involves socio-economic
factors, environmental aspects, and a comprehensive overview of
development. The following sectors are selected to illustrate the
ambivalent repercussions of technology in Thailand when viewed
from a human rights perspective.

The majority of the world's population live in rural areas.
This is the case in Thailand, where some 70 per cent of the
population are rural-based. They are also disadvantaged by
limited access to basic services and belong to the poorer stratum
of the community. For this reason, they deserve particular
attention when there is talk of human rights and technology. How
to reduce poverty, how to overcome unemployment and inequality,
how to lessen the migration to urban areas, how to increase the
yield of rural occupations, and how to promote greater
self-reliance are recurrent questions for Thailand's development
process.

When the country first started to have national development
plans in the early 1960s, rural areas were much neglected. The
two decades that followed the First Development Plan (1961-1966)
were biased in favour of infrastructural development, for
example, roads, electricity, and dams, which tended to favour
urban rather than outlying rural areas. Reappraisal came with the
Fifth National Economic and Social Development Plan (1982-1986)
("The Fifth Plan"), with its accent on rural poverty
eradication. The Fifth Plan acknowledged past failings, including
a top-down development process which expected a trickle-down
effect to take place from growth at the national level, the
superimposition of welfare efforts on rural people without their
participation, limited understanding by policy makers of rural
problems, and the lack of basic necessities in rural areas. The
Plan identified as special target areas villages ("backward
rural areas") in 37 provinces for upgrading on a priority
basis. The philosophy began to change with the enuciation of
these precepts:

1. To be area specific, giving top priority to the high
poverty concentration areas;

2. To develop high poverty concentration areas so that the
people will have enough to eat and to clothe themselves.
Basic public services will be made available in sufficient
supplies;

3. To initiate people's self-help programmes;

4. To solve the poverty problems in all localities with
emphasis on low-cost and self-help techniques;

5. To encourage the maximum participation by the people in
solving their problems.32

Table 3.

Input

Process

Output

Food

Consumption

Increased weight

Vaccine

Injection

Reduction of disease

Vegetables

Cultivation

Provision of food

These strategies were and are linked with the notion of
integrated rural development, entailing cooperation between the
Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry
of Health, and the Ministry of Agriculture, to encourage
"rural industrialisation, the establishment and
strengthening of agro-industrial complexes, the modernisation of
agriculture, better integration of women in all stages of the
production process, and employment for the rural
population." 33

This has also led to the adoption of basic minimum needs
indicators (Jor Por Tor), first experimented with in Korat
province in north-eastern Thailand. Subsequently, this was
extended to all parts of Thailand. As stated in a manual for
training those involved in utilizing these indicators,34
the aim is to enable the population to know their basic minimum
needs, to improve their quality of life, and to promote
cooperation between governmental and non-governmental sectors,
with popular participation. The approach seems to be based upon
felt needs, with a predominance of objective rather than
subjective elements. It is also influenced by the input-output
model, with additional emphasis on performance and coverage. This
blend is illustrated in table 3.35 The consumption,
injection, and cultivation processes exemplify
"performance," while the indicators may stipulate the
percentage of the groups expected to be covered under the time
phase allocated as a measure of "coverage."

Basically, a series of indicators, originally 32 in number and
currently in the process of being expanded to 34, was established
to be used in selected parts of the country (now extended to
villages all over Thailand). These indicators are used to gauge
the needs of villagers; this may then lead to mobilization of
resources and services to respond to those needs, in terms of
projects and budgets.36

The 32 indicators are divided into eight main groups, as
follows:

A. The people eat nutritious food which is good for their
health:

1. Children up to five years of age do not suffer from
malnutrition.
2. Children between 5 and 14 have sufficient food.
3. Pregnant women eat properly and the children born are
not less than 3,000 grams in weight.

B. The people have appropriate shelter and environment:

4. Houses are well built to last at least five years.
5. The family arranges the home in an orderly fashion.
6. The family has a toilet meeting sanitation standards.
7. The family has sufficient clean drinking water.

C. The people have access to basic social services:

8. Children under one year old are vaccinated.
9. Children of school age have access to compulsory
education.
10. Children of primary school age are vaccinated.
11. People between 14 and 50 are literate.
12. The family obtains news concerning livelihood,
health, law.
13. Pregnant women are cared for before giving birth.
14. Pregnant women are cared for at the birth of the
child and after the birth.

D. The people are secure in life and in property:

15. The people are safe in life and in property.

E. The people can produce and consume food satisfactorily:

16. The family grows crops on a rotational basis.
17. The family uses fertilizers.
18. The family prevents and eliminates insects affecting
crops.
19. The family prevents epidemics among animals.
20. The family uses seeds and animals provided by
officials.

F. The family can utilize family planning:

21. Spouses have no more than two children and can use
birth control as desired.

G. The people participate in the development process and
choose their livelihood:

22. The family is a unit established by its members to
help each other.
23. The village participates in self-development.
24. The village participates in looking after common
property.
25. The village participates in looking after cultural
heritage.
26. The village protects natural resources.
27. The people use their right to vote within the
democracy.
28. The village committee is able to plan and follow its
plan (for development purposes).

H. The people develop their spirit:

29. In the village, there is mutual bonding and help.
30. Family members practice a religious activity at least
once a month.
31. Family members do not gamble and are not addicted to
drugs.
32. The family does not spend excessively on traditional
rites and rituals.

Technology has come in extremely handy to collate the data and
mobilize help for rural people in relation to the above.
Basically, two types of information are gathered: that collected
by the heads of households, which is then synthesized by the
subdistrict development committee and sent to the province; and
that collected independently by the same committee as basic data
concerning the village. These data are channelled to the
provincial rural development centre and are computerized before
being sent to Bangkok for further computerization at the national
level. The data are used as means for preparing projects to meet
the basic minimum needs of the villagers and for mobilizing
resources to help them. Three types of situations may call for
resources (including technology) as follows :37

1. The villagers' own resources, e.g. in planting
vegetables.

2. The villagers' own resources coupled with those of the
government, e.g. in setting up a credit scheme or fund in the
village.

3. Governmental funds, e.g. basic welfare services.

As the actual use of these indicators is in the nascent stage,
it is difficult to assess their true impact, subject to these
observations. First, owing to the variety of questionnaires (at
least four), which have to be synthesized and reduced to
percentages, the system is complex. Second, despite the
complexity, the data gathered are an invaluable source of
information concerning the state of villages all over Thailand.
Third, where there is a lack of certain basic necessities, the
information has led to programmes and budgets to help raise the
standards to meet the basic minimum needs. Some 70 per cent of
the projects of this nature which were sent to the Ministry of
the Interior for support have met with a favourable response.

Fourth, some provinces are adopting indicators other than the
32 mentioned, especially if their level of development is already
high. In one province, an indicator has been adopted to assess
land tenure, an issue not raised in the 32 indicators mentioned.
This reflects the need to review the status quo and move towards
more redistribution of wealth. But the officials concerned may be
afraid that this type of indicator will raise expectations and
invite rights advocacy. Fifth, the 32 indicators are still weak
on various issues, for example, they do not cover broadly the
interests of specific groups such as women, children, and the
aged, particularly in relation to their legal rights and
well-being.38

In practice, in spite of improvements in the livelihood of
some villagers, others remain in a deprived position. The current
land purchase and investment boom has also meant greater
readiness by villagers to sell land for short-term benefits,
thereby losing their means of self-reliance in the long run.
Although the population growth has declined in recent years,
demographic pressures continue to cause migration to urban areas
and encroachment upon national forest land.

While well-intentioned, the rural development policies
mentioned tend to be top-down in effect; policies and budgetary
resources depend very much upon the Bangkok administration. This
is compounded by the failure to decentralize power from the
centre and devolve resources to local leaders. The dimension of
human rights and technology, in this respect, can be broadened by
reference to other issues such as agriculture, rural
industrialization, and environmental concerns elaborated below.